Will the Peepoo Disposable Toilet Work For Indian Slums?

The New York Times recently reported on the Peepoo, a biodegradable plastic bag containing urea crystals that serves as a single-use disposable ‘toilet’ for people that lack access to regular toilets. The urea crystals kill the harmful bacteria in the excrement that would ordinarily end up contaminating water supplies and spreading very preventable diseases.

The World Health Organization estimates that unsafe water kills 1.8 million people a year, and that inadequate sanitation and hygiene is responsible for 88% of that burden. When you include the millions who daily suffer from non-lethal sickness from contaminated water, its easy to say that this is one of the world’s biggest problems.

The inventor of the Peepoo got the idea from observing African slum dwellers using regular plastic bags as ‘helicopter toilets’ that would be disposed of by twirling overhead after use to fling as far as possible. Bags easily burst on or after impact, so this practice is as ineffective in dealing with the problem as it is humorously disgusting. Can you imagine all the bag bombs flying around Kenyan slums in the morning?

The company claims to have done successful testing of the bags in Kenya, so would disposable, biodegradable ‘toilets’ work in Indian slums? Let’s consider the question from several perspectives.

Economics

Each bag will be sold for $.02 – .03 , so an average Indian slum family of 5 would spend 10 – 15 cents (or Rs 5 – 8 ) per day, or Rs. 150 – 230 per month for their waste disposal needs. That can be as high as 10% of household income for waste disposal in the face of several compelling alternatives.

Option 2: Gov’t toilet. On-going programs in most states allocate funds for toilet construction for those who lack access. Financial cost: Rs. 1000 unsubsidized; or Rs. 100 with NGO subsidy.

Option 3: Pay-use toilet. Like seen in Slumdog Millionaire, or those operated by a number of private players like Sulabh. Financial cost: Rs. 1 per use.

Clearly, any option trumps the Peepoo. The economics of a solution usually determine its fate, but there are ways to mitigate economic cost so we’ll examine social aspects next.

Social Dimensions

First, there is a widespread belief in India that the excrement of children is more ‘pure’ and less dirty than that of adults. Slum kids tend to defecate openly even when their households have a toilet, and dislodging the adult misinformation around changing this practice is challenging.

Secondly, most Indian slum dwellers use water and their left-hand to clean themselves after defecating. I wonder if the design accommodates for this, as it would make it more challenging to tie and dispose of the bag in a manner that doesn’t contaminate the right hand.

Boy holding his own poop in a bag.

Third, the stigma surrounding any type of waste handling is huge, and also has deeply entrenched caste and class characteristics. An illustrative example is that people are opposed to using the biogas from composting toilets to cook even after all the smell has been removed. Ignoring these facts, would you want to be seen carrying a bag labeled “Peepoo” in big letters? I didn’t think so.

Fourth is the question of privacy. For women in Indian slums, this is often the driving force behind getting a toilet, trumping all other financial and social costs associated with open defecation. Peepoo does nothing to address this fundamental market-driver for toilets.

Lastly, one of the value propositions of Peepoo is that can be buried and used and fertilizer for crops. However, there is usually very little digging that happens for human waste in Indian slums. Only farming communities have adopted this practice, though I have not researched how widespread it is.

One segment of Lok Darshan‘s first episode, made by our talented team drawn from Gujarat’s largest slum, examines the realities of toilets for Indian slums through humor and song.

Community Compliance

Assuming economic and social barriers are overcome, Peepoo requires 100% community compliance in order to reduce the burden of disease. In other words, it only takes one person pooping outdoors to contaminate a community’s water supply. To my knowledge, the only organization deploying toilets and sanitation solutions that has understood this from the beginning is Gram Vikas, which insists that 100% of a community sign up for full sanitation facilities before deploying anything. Everyone else can pat themselves on the back for building a few people toilets, but cannot rightly hope to impact that family’s or that community’s incidence of waterborne disease.

So What Is Peepoo Good For?

Despite this product’s current limitations in the context of Indian slums, I would argue that it has a number of practical, potentially powerful uses besides those in African slums.

Refugee Camps and Disaster Areas

Keeping them from becoming breeding grounds of disease is difficult. I’d be willing to wager that the end-to-end cost of the current portable options is much higher than the PeePoo, and that gov’ts and aid agencies would be thrilled to take advantage of the cost savings.

Hikers / Campers In The West

On trails and locations that lack access to toilet facilities, Peepoo would be ideal. Stores like North Face and REI could probably sell them for $1 / bag or more, especially if the price aimed at subsidizing 50+ free bags for refugee camps.

Diapers

Seriously. Just counting America’s 8.8 million babies, we generate 27.4 billion disposable diapers a year. Getting even a small fraction of these to be biodegradable reaps huge benefits, though landfill degradation is still slower than normal degradation. Again, I would subsidize free bags for Africa through sales to disposable diaper makers.

Regular Plastic Bags

The Pacific has its plastic garbage patch and it was recently discovered that the Atlantic has one to match, leading progressive cities like San Francisco to ban plastic bags entirely. During the 2005 monsoon season, Mumbai was flooded because plastic bags had clogged the drainage systems, leading to a statewide ban on them. If the plastic in Peepoo is truly biodegradable, why not take the urea out of them, re/de-brand the bags, and make them available to all the places still using plastic. Its an instant market that addresses a global issue, and has huge potential to subsidize free PeePoos where needed.

All that said, there is a model for how Peepoo could work in Indian slums. Whether the company is smart enough to discern it’s appropriate use and drive the market towards this solution is an entirely different question, and perhaps the test of how committed they are to their stated mission.

18 Responses

Just so you know, Peepoo bags were tested in urban slums in Bangladesh, where social considerations such as stigma, washing practices, etc are similar to those in India. They were widely accepted by participants and considered to be a successful sanitation approach. Report available here: http://www.gtz.de/en/dokumente/gtz2010-peepoo-bags-bangladesh-trial.pdf

Also, Peepoo bags can be hugely beneficial to women who are able to use them in the private place of their choice (e.g. in the home). Given that many women in urban slums do not have access to a toilet and are unable to defecate or urinate in the open as this is considered socially unacceptable, Peepoo bags are a good (interim) solution to the current practice by many women: avoiding urination all day and going to the toilet in the middle of the night, posing both health and security risks.

In urban areas, the company recognizes the need to establish a collection, distribution and processing system given the limited possibility to bury the bags on site.

There are many reasons why infrastructure-based sanitation solutions are difficult to implement in urban slums (starting with lack of land ownership) and while the Peepoo may not be the ultimate answer for everyone, I believe it is an option that urban slums could benefit from.

Thanks for the insightful comment, EAW. I noticed you were the study team leader when Peepoo was tested in Bangladesh, so I took the time to read the bulk of the report you referenced.

For those without the stamina to get through the full 92 pages, I’ll provide a few key highlights from the report.

Bags were given out for free
Post-study, 61% of participants said they were not willing to pay for bags, despite 87% of study participants feeling that using toilet bags were better than their current practice. 19% were willing to pay 1 BDT per bag (equivalent to 4-6% of household income over month’s use for the average family) though the estimated cost per bag when mass produced amounted to 14 – 22% of household income for average usage over a month, not inclusive of a collection system which significantly adds to cost. This indicates that the economics of bags are not viable without some kind of subsidy. Authors of the report rightly point out that even sewer-connected systems in the West are subsidized, so gov’t and partners should be willing to subsidize bags. However, compared to the subsidy for ‘pacca’ toilets, bags are significantly more expensive over the long term and its not clear whether the benefits from fertilizer creation offset this cost.

Burden of disease and health impact was not assessed in the report.
Though it was rightly excluded from the scope of this study, reducing disease is a key objective of these bags. The open question is what level of community compliance is needed to actually make an impact on health. Orissa’s rainfall in East India similar to Bangladesh’s, and there is good data there to indicate that 1 person defecating outdoors during rains is enough to contaminate water supply for a small village. What percentage of people need to use a toilet bag in drier climates to reduce burden of disease? This question should be rigorously examined for both wet and dry climates. Its actually quite a complex study to complete not only because of the difficulties of accurate pre-test surveys, but because of the time frame required and the multiple variables that contribute to disease within the test group like hand-washing and proper bag usage, handling, and disposal. 79% of participants reported that feces ended up ‘above the knot’ at least once during their trial, and this too could nullify the health benefits.

Bags do end up enhancing privacy and dignity, esp. for women
60% of the bags were used indoors, but usage dropped heavily during heavy rains because the entire family was indoors and most households have a single room. Despite some indications of stigma, like 47% of users feeling uncomfortable holding the bag after use, they would still openly carry them to the collectors. This is very positive, and indicates that a market for these bags could exist for the sole purpose of enhancing privacy and dignity if the economic constraints were bypassed.

Funny data
67% of participants indicated that they washed their hands after use. The actual number is probably much lower, because 2/3 of a community handwashing after defecation would be a very high compliance figure for slum communities in India where NGOs have been consistently hammering the importance of doing this. However, that 2/3rd of participants responded in this way does seem to indicate that they are exposed to an NGO that pushes this message and that they know what the ‘right answer’ is. This suspicion would be corroborated by the fact that 100% of participants said the bag was useful pre-survey, clearly indicative of selection bias.

Other interesting report data
27% of participants stated that family members had strong objections to them using Peepoo. Half of the comments about the bag from non-participating community members were negative. 77% of users did not wash themselves above the bag, indicating significant potential for disease transmission despite 100% community compliance and flawless usage, handling, and disposal (esp. in wet climates). 2% of bags broke before use and 5 burst after use. More than 20 bags stored together created a strong odor, indicating further design and transport challenges. 8% of bag users said the system was worse than their current practice.

Conclusions
Overall, the Peepoo bag still has significant economic hurdles to overcome before its viable, and while the social obstacles may be fairly easily handled, the social practices and compliance around toilet bag usage presents a huge obstacle to reducing burden of disease. Gram Vikas‘ system of 100% inclusion in the deployment of water and sanitation solutions for villages is still a superior economic and social solution. Using the Peer Water Exchange to fund such projects effectively addresses the challenge of scale in funding and managing the vast number of projects needed to deal with the water crisis. That said, it seems there is still a market that could be tapped solely on the added dignity, privacy, and safety that a Peepoo bag offers in the South Asian context, particularly for women.

Thanks for reading through the report, Rahul. I really appreciate your feedback.

I definitely agree with your points. A bit more elaboration from my side:

COST: Most certainly, it would be difficult for Peepoo bags to be introduced into the free market at their current production cost. Subsidies are necessary until the product gains popularity and the financial benefit of fertilizer production can really be determined. But most likely subsidies will always be required (the idea is not to give the bags out for free, despite the fact that people are currently not willing to pay for them. The objective is to, over time, establish the value of the product and encourage a culture of spending on sanitation which currently does not prevail.) Hopefully, Peepoo bags are an interim solution and eventually slums will cease to exist and everyone can afford to build a nice composting toilet, but while they do, I think it is a worthwhile investment for local governments or NGOs to subsidize their purchase and the establishment of a system of distribution, collection and processing.

HEALTH BENEFITS: the study in Bangladesh did not evaluate the health impacts, as we thought it would be unreasonable to try to measure health impacts after a 10-day trial. The purpose was to find out if anyone would actually be willing to use them. Given that they were largely accepted and appreciated by the users, the next step will be to conduct a larger pilot to establish things like health benefits, price points, etc. Certainly, it will be important to study the risk of disease transmission if bags are not closed properly and through anal-washing water (the latter is currently considered to be a negligible health risk). It would be hard to achieve full community compliance in an urban slum, but less bacteria is a step in the right direction!

Thanks again for taking the time to evaluate the Peepoo bags as a sanitation alternative. They are certainly not the only solution for the world’s sanitation crisis, but I do believe they should play an important role in providing slum dwellers with more options.

Even without the cost of the Peepoo collection system, which can increase costs by >10%, the private toilet facility pays for itself in 2 years of Peepoo.

I should add that the cost of toilet facility varies from state-to-state in India. In Gujarat (West India), the gov’ts actual cost per toilet was Rs. 9400 in 2007. However, most agree that the bulk of this price was the corruption premium that the bureaucrats and others extracted along the chain of approval and implementation.

In Orissa (East India), a total sanitation system deployed by Gram Vikas that includes a separate private toilet, shower, a tap for each, and a separate tap for the kitchen cost ~Rs. 3300. The caveat here is that this price includes the free labor of the villages who provide almost all the labor costs. In the Orissa model, you achieve extremely high levels of usage and ‘ownership’ because the villagers not only contributed Rs. 1000 per household on average (with the remainder coming from gov’t and NGO subsidy), but used their own labor to build the system. This means villagers first understood the value of sanitation, and are willing to pay for it.

This is a key objective of behind the Peepoo bag, as you state.

the idea is not to give the bags out for free, despite the fact that people are currently not willing to pay for them.

Why not give them out for free? I get free toilet use at McDonalds on almost every road trip and have not eaten there in years. Why not adopt a model that cross-subsidizes Peepoos so that the poorest and most needy can get them absolutely free?

Aravind Eye Hospital gives virtually free cataract surgeries to 2/3rd of its patients through a subsidy from the 1/3 that do pay, and it still generates a ~40% financial surplus.

Do you mean to tell me that the Peepoo bag is in any way more complex than cataract surgery?

The way to make Peepoo work the best is to give it away to the poorest people, by subsidizes from those who can afford to pay.

I’d welcome some thoughts on the opportunities for cross-subsidy that I outlined in the post, ie campers, diapers, regular bags, etc.

I know that many people provide free drinking water to thirsty people. Such places in gujarat are called parab.
This they do it as seva to the needy, and accumulate punya.

Similarly, people can provide peepoo bags to all and any who care to use it.

Many do not know how to use the bag. Putting the bag on ground and sit over it does not seem a neat way; tying the bag to the body also does not seem a good way.

Suppose, if there is a low cost portable structure that holds the bag, and then you sit on it; that sounds a good idea to me.

A side question: Is it possible to make a low cost portable bidet that could be used in villages of Bhaarat? The good thing about the bidet is that you do not need to touch the rear to clean it up.The squirt of the bidet does the cleaning job well.

[…] on AfriGadget, but the reality of course is that each community has its own habits. Here’s another blog post by someone who tried to brake it down for India (with additional comments by Elisabeth von Münch, GTZ sustainable sanitation & ecosan team […]

Being someone who has peed and pooped outside many times. Pee is gone with in hours. and is 80% ~ 90% water and some urea acid. New for poop having used the same place before it biodegrades in abour 3 ~ 5 days. So for this peepoo bag to work it needs to biodegrade as fast as the poop itself,.. Otherwise what is the point ?

I have come to know about Peepoo bag for 1st time but the idea is commendable. Though it can’t be a complete solution for problem in discussion, it is a good alternative to be communicated. We are talking about other alternatives and Govt. is doing a lot for them but that is not sufficient to handle everything. Also, existing toilet systems aren’t maintenance free. They need regular cleaning as well as proper disinfection system to avoid diseases. For Indians, the culture isn’t developed in the way Peepoo advises but the culture of safe sanitation is much better than culture of open contamination. In other cases as well, it will be helpful to save water and remove waste for its further utilization as fertilizer when used in systematized channel.

Recently i heard about a Society in Mumbai near the Juhu beach which hires security guards to ensure that people do not defecate in the adjoining compound and in the beach near the complex. If the idea of a peepoo bag is propagated to them, it makes it more sense for the society to give the bag free instead of hiring of the security guards. Also idea of toilets with water facilities would bring issues like providing the water, operating costs etc

I agree that it is not an easy task to educate the slum people to use PeePoo bag.

But what about the rich high society people? It is them who use huge amount of water to drain away their dirt through sewers to the river. If they can use adult diapers for their old and sick seniors, it should not be difficult for them to switch over to PeePoo for themselves. These people should become role model for others before one thinks of slum people.

However more importantly, before promoting these bags, it is necessary to install good & reliable infrastructure for collection of used bags and the composting depots.

I am sure that knowing the advantages, there can be many philanthropic institutions in India who will come forward to subsidize these bags.

This is a wonderful innovation to address the water and in turns food security of India.

Why should bagging poop be considered a serious sanitation solution?
How the scaling up of such practice be manged – Garbage dumps in an urban slum or rural street corner piled up with poop/urine bags? Addressing the problem of combined mass (including the peepoo bags) of human waste is challenging.

Post disaster (rescue-relief-rehab phases) its certainly very effective to bag for people, agencies.

Applicable to everyone of us yet appropriate regional sanitation solutions need be integral to municipal managements (along with garbage) it’s not a glamorous task and however playful a thought may sound is welcome. Settlements formal or informal, corporate or governments seldom plan or budget adequately for sanitation (mostly altogether missing this critical component) Prevailing leaderships or decision processes for the poorest and worst affected are dwarfed by this pervasive problem.

Toilet is the most complex and costly part of a house. Disposal of toilet waste is the among the most complex and costly operation for a campus or city. Human urine and excreta are toxic, foul smelling. Process of natural decomposition is prolonged and attracts major insects, deceases. Composting toilets remain only as romantic demonstrations good for community garden/co-op situations where people must diligently volunteer to maintain them. After the individual disposal only the problem compounds and the Peepoo bags provide only marginal advantage.

One Kilogram of fecal matter and one Liter of urine per person per day. Multiply it with numbers and try comprehending the logistics of disposing your family house or apartment waste when there is no flush toilet or street dumpster. Imagine the numbers for your neighborhood or city. Thinking on these issues more often, and working on affordable housing we question ourselves more often and

The scientists and researches (if any reading this) experimenting with human waste please note (and also students and urbanists) Human excreta not at all significant source as bio-gas or fertilizer (unlike the cows/chicken)

Bio gas system from human excreta – say 100 people per day is not enough to of any use (warming water or light torch for an hour) while urine/fecal matter could actually destroy a healthy plant within a week.

Combined knowledge of everything from social dynamics to advanced chemistry and urban design is necessary to address this issue and backed by sound, sustained financial investment.

A properly sized and reasonably leak-safe ‘septic tank’ (with ‘improved’ multiple chambers and vents) remains the norm for a sustainable decentralized system recommend to individuals as well as municipalities universally advising GOs/ NGOs to plan and budget for it eventually for slums and disaster situations.

Given every solution has problems, any of you have a better argument or fancy? eg the Gates Foundation Million Dollars Toilet Awards rating any better than time tested septic tank system?

Peepo is creating a dangerous trend of plastic bags which are extremely detrimental to all current practices. it is expensive, and people in Muslim cultures mostly find it difficult and beyond dignified sanitation solutions to use the bag.
peepo experience in Kibera was very bad , a largest slum in Africa where it created a second layer of already complicating sanitation problems.
A commercial product should not guide humanitarian interventions at this level.